Group items matching

in title, tags, annotations or url

Reuters reports that an executive of French oil company Total expects oil production to peak before the end of the next decade - and wants the company to move into nuclear power in the post-oil age (something Bucky Fuller predicted would be the next step for the oil industry) - Total sees nuclear energy for growth after peak oil. French oil and gas giant Total (TOTF.PA: Quote, Profile, Research, Stock Buzz) is targeting nuclear energy to drive growth long after oil and gas output peak, a top executive said on Monday. "In the future, energy demand will be constrained by tight supply," Arnaud Chaperon, Total's senior vice president for electricity and new energies, said in a presentation to a nuclear energy conference in Qatar. "Oil and gas will still play a big role in the energy balance. But in the electrification of the world economy, nuclear will play a major role, together with the development of solar and other renewables ... That is why Total is very interested in developing nuclear and renewables."

If California expands its renewable power generation to be a third of electricity delivered in the state by 2020, it may cost $60 billion, the state's utility regulator said in a report issued on Thursday. It is more costly to make electricity with renewable power -- solar, wind, geothermal and other sources that emit no or low amounts of global-warming greenhouse gases -- than with natural gas, nuclear and coal power plants.

The election of Barack Obama has put the wind back into the sails of the renewable energy sector, where investor confidence had been badly punctured by the credit crisis. Clean technology and green energy stocks have soared as City analysts predict a major boost from the incoming president. Solar Integrated Technologies rose by 30% yesterday after increases of 22% by Renewable Energy Corporation and 16% by the wind turbine maker Vestas in the 24 hours before, when they were helped upwards by oil prices returning to above $70 a barrel.

Barack Obama and John McCain are promising voters a Tomorrowland of electric cars and high-speed trains and solar panels, a vision of American life without a drop of imported oil. But their plans to get there look more like Fantasyland. A host of energy policy experts agree that true "energy independence"-a key catch phrase of this presidential campaign-would be far more expensive and disruptive than either candidate is telling you.

For a while, it was a standard-issue Al Gore jeremiad, with calls for everything from installing solar panels in Darfur (seriously) to legal action against "the carbon lobby" for denying global warming (ditto). But then Mr. Gore really got going and told his disciples to head -- literally -- to the barricades to "stop" coal.

With the aim of ending a regulatory turf war, U.S. government agencies on Tuesday said they would work together to cut red tape and spur development of offshore renewable energy projects. Under the agreement, the Interior Department will have jurisdiction over offshore wind and solar energy projects, while the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission will oversee offshore projects that generate electricity from wave and tidal currents.

Cleantech.com reports that the Irish government has introduced feed-in tariffs and streamlined regulations to encourage construction of small scale renewable energy projects - Ireland pushes for fast action on small-scale renewables. Ireland expects to boost its rural economies with a new long-term feed-in tariff program encouraging consumers to install renewables energy generation projects on homes and farms. The incentives are expected to help with the long-term cost of projects, but the government limited the scope of the incentives in order to push for fast action on the part of consumers. Irish Energy Minister Eamon Ryan established the tariff of €0.19 ($0.26) per kilowatt hour, but the rate only applies for the first 4,000 projects registered during the next three years.The incentive applies to wind, solar, hydro and combined heat-and-power projects.

In remarks focused on the promise of renewable energy and demand-side management, US Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Chairman Jon Wellinghoff on Wednesday suggested that there may never be another new nuclear or coal power plant built in the country. Pointing to upwards of 1,000 GW of potential wind energy in the Midwest and West, new solar power production and storage technologies and emerging hydrokinetic power resources, Wellinghoff asserted that renewables are poised to play a substantial, gap-filling role in the US energy picture.

It turns out that 2008 was another record year for clean energy. According to Clean Edge's just-released Clean Energy Trends 2009 report, the three major clean-energy sectors -- solar photovoltaics (PV), wind power and biofuels -- kept up a blistering growth rate, increasing 53 percent from $75.8 billion in 2007 to $115.9 billion in revenues in 2008.

President Obama's $26.4 billion Department of Energy (DOE) budget request for fiscal year (FY) 2010 substantially increases new cash for the development of renewable energies, energy efficiency, and for measures to curb carbon dioxide emissions, but it cuts funding to coal and nuclear programs-fuels that produce 70% of the nation's electricity. The proposed FY 2010 budget, which would take effect on October 1 if approved by Congress, complements $38.7 billion the DOE will invest as part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. Energy Secretary Steven Chu last week detailed the budget request, highlighting major funding changes from FY 2009. He stressed that while the budget makes important investments in energy independence and job creation, it also cuts back on programs that don't work as well or are no longer needed. Favoring Renewables Among the major increases were to the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE). Its budget of $2.3 billion-an increase of 6% over FY 2009-builds on the Recovery Act funding of $16.8 billion. Solar energy got the biggest boost, gaining $320 million, an 83% increase from FY 2009. Wind received $75 million (a 36% increase from FY 2009), geothermal got $50 million (14% increase), while biomass and biorefinery systems research and development gained $235 million (8% increase).

In the world of renewables, most of the attention is on the wind and the sun. Geothermal power just hasn't gotten the same respect. That could be changing, as both the Obama Administration and Silicon Valley are considering the heat under the ground as a potentially huge source of clean, domestic U.S. energy, but recent setbacks are calling into question how much geothermal can contribute. Given the potential benefits, we should be doubling our efforts to make geothermal a viable power source for the U.S. Some background: All thermal power plants use the same basic process. A heat source (burning coal or gas, uranium, concentrated solar energy) is used to turn water into steam, and the energy released turns a turbine that produces electricity. What sets geothermal apart is that the steam comes directly from the ground. Water percolates down through cracks in the ground and is heated to the boiling point by hot rocks underground (in some cases coming back up as a geyser - think Old Faithful), and the resulting steam is drawn up via a well to a turbine.

Legislation that would require greater use of renewable energy, make it easier to build power lines and allow oil and gas drilling near Florida's coast advanced Wednesday in the Senate. The Energy and Natural Resources Committee voted 15-8 to clear the measure, although both Democrats and Republicans - for different reasons - said they had concerns about the bill and hoped to make major changes on the Senate floor. The legislation's primary thrust is to expand the use of renewable sources of energy such as wind, solar and geothermal sources as well as deal with the growing concerns about the inadequacies of the nation's high-voltage power grid.

"Just once, it would be nice if a president would level with Americans on energy. Barack Obama isn't that president. His speech the other night was about political damage control -- his own. It was full of misinformation and mythology. Obama held out a gleaming vision of an America that would convert to the "clean" energy of, presumably, wind, solar and biomass. It isn't going to happen for many, many decades, if ever. For starters, we won't soon end our "addiction to fossil fuels." Oil, coal and natural gas supply about 85 percent of America's energy needs. The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) expects energy consumption to grow only an average of 0.5 percent annually from 2008 to 2035, but that's still a 14 percent cumulative increase. Fossil fuel usage would increase slightly in 2035 and its share would still account for 78 percent of the total. "

There has never been a more important time to invest in green technologies, yet many of us believe these efforts are doomed to failure. What nonsense, writes Chris Goodall

Building an alt-energy power plant is risky and expensive, but thanks to a new ruling by an Environmental Protection Agency panel, building a coal plant may become riskier and more expensive. The Environmental Appeals Board blocked the EPA from issuing a permit to a proposed coal plant addition near Vernal, Utah, about 150 miles east of Salt Lake City.

Two of the world's richest men bankroll alternative-energy initiatives on the November ballot. Each is opposed by some of the very champions of those alternatives. Adding to the confusion, both measures carry "renewable energy" in their titles.

Are the relocalization eco-freaks finally getting a clue??